Contract Breach: Claimant Recovers Partial Deposit in Small Claims Case
📌 In brief
The claimant hired the respondent to provide various services but the respondent failed to complete the work. The claimant successfully recovered a portion of the deposit and additional fees from the respondent in a Small Claims case.
⚖️ Legal holding
A contractor is entitled to recover a portion of the deposit and related fees when the other party breaches the contract.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The contractor is entitled to a partial refund of the deposit due to the breaching party's failure to complete the work.
- Hosting fees and licensing fees incurred before the breach are recoverable as they were necessary for the business operations.
- The breaching party must pay for the value of the metal dice set provided for the photoshoot.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The claim for handing over all social media accounts created under the contract was not included in the original dispute notice and thus dismissed.
- The request for reimbursement of a camera gimbal was not included in the original dispute notice and thus dismissed.
- Licensing fees claimed in submissions exceed those stated in the initial dispute notice and are not supported by the evidence.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the failure to complete contracted services and the recovery of a deposit and related fees.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the claimant, finding that the respondent breached the contract and was liable for the recovery of the deposit and fees.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were cited in the decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the claimant's proof that the respondent breached the contract by failing to complete the work.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may be able to recover a portion of a deposit and related fees if the other party breaches the contract.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence and documents that mattered included the contract, text messages, emails, and Facebook chat messages between the parties.